Rex,
at this link you'll find an interesting thread:
https://groups.google.com/g/bit.listserv.ibm-main/c/B04G-HasOd4
As somebody (who is at least 30K light years beyond me) probably the right
way is to use TIMEUSED macro.
It depends on how much you need to rely the info.
I recently wrote an assem
You can always map the TCB and reference field TCBTTIME to get the
accumulated CPU time for the task - I think its offset 316 decimal.
Joe
On Tue, Jul 11, 2023 at 4:22 PM Pommier, Rex
wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I just got this tossed at me by an application developer. Cobol 6.3. Is
> there some bu
Thanks Michael, I tried your routine here and it did exactly what I needed, so
thank you.
Peter
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Schmitt, Michael
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2023 3:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL question: How to
Is this z/OS? I hope so ...
You say:
I need this for determining from where a high-usage subroutine is being called
unnecessarily in a large main program
(many called modules with multiple levels of CALL, but no recursion).
are these modules separate load modules which are dynamically called
a
I am attempting to post the assembler program here for reference, we'll see if
the listserv accepts it without mangling.
To use, call it passing the area you want it to return the calling program name
in. The call_level_e equate controls how many levels up it goes.
--
&thisp
You use the LE service CEETBCK. This is the traceback utility and can be
used to walk the call chain backwards from Enteprise COBOL.
Joe
On Tue, May 2, 2023 at 12:08 PM Schmitt, Michael
wrote:
> I wrote an assembler subprogram that gets the name of the caller of the
> caller, i.e. if A > B >
I wrote an assembler subprogram that gets the name of the caller of the caller,
i.e. if A > B > asm, it returns A. Or any number of levels up that you want. It
works for static and dynamic calls, for both Language Environment compatible
and non-LE programs.*
The logic to get the program name is
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: COBOL question
A lot of times, U4038 is not enough region...
Joe
On Mon, Apr 10, 2023 at 6:15 AM Cameron Conacher <
03cfc59146bb-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:03cfc59146bb-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>>
wrote:
t might be related to EXPEDITER.
>
> That is my current WAG.
>
>
> Thanks
>
> …….Cameron
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf
> Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Sunday, April 9, 2023 8:07 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subj
, 2023 8:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: COBOL question
I can't see your code of course but my WAG is a programmer logic error.
(Sorry!) I am going to guess your logic is such that you try to free the same
area twice or, less likely, corrupt your pointer.
You sa
I can't see your code of course but my WAG is a programmer logic error.
(Sorry!) I am going to guess your logic is such that you try to free the same
area twice or, less likely, corrupt your pointer.
You say you check to see if it is null before freeing. Do you set it to NULL
after freeing?
Ch
: Saturday, April 8, 2023 8:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: COBOL question
Region card big enough? I’ve seen that abend via not enough memory.
Bob
Sent from Proton Mail for iOS
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 8:17 PM, Charles Hardee wrote:
> I have not seen this exactly like w
Region card big enough? I’ve seen that abend via not enough memory.
Bob
Sent from Proton Mail for iOS
On Sat, Apr 8, 2023 at 8:17 PM, Charles Hardee wrote:
> I have not seen this exactly like what you describe, but I do have some
> thoughts.
> The pointer you are using for the ALLOCATE, does i
I have not seen this exactly like what you describe, but I do have some
thoughts.
The pointer you are using for the ALLOCATE, does it have a value clause,
specifically VALUE NULL.
If not, the pointer could have an unknown value that does not compare equal
to NULL so you would attempt to FREE it.
I liked Panvalet.
Sent from my iPhone
I promise you I can’t type or
Spell on any smartphone
> On Jun 9, 2020, at 15:53, David Spiegel wrote:
>
> +1 sleazy-freaking-trieve.
> (I used to support it, Panvalet and Librarian)
>
>> On 2020-06-09 16:27, Joe Monk wrote:
>> "Easytrieve plus"
>>
>
+1 sleazy-freaking-trieve.
(I used to support it, Panvalet and Librarian)
On 2020-06-09 16:27, Joe Monk wrote:
"Easytrieve plus"
You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
Joe
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab wrote:
4GL - I've used Telon which takes a scr
ssion List On Behalf Of
John McKown
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 4:43 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
[External Email. Exercise caution when clicking links or opening attachments.]
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:28 PM Joe Monk wrote:
> "Easytrieve plus"
>
&g
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 3:28 PM Joe Monk wrote:
> "Easytrieve plus"
>
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>
We still use SleavyTrieve+ in production. Crap, we have some RACF reports,
written over 28 years ago (before my time) which use EZTP to parse the
output of an "LU *". I really should replace t
I used quikjob for nearly 20 years as a systems pgmr. It was a very simple
yet powerful product. It also had several other quikxxx modules to handle
vsam easily and a report module to make very neat reports from bland data.
I think the company got bought out and the products renamed at some point
I have not see sleazytrieve on 20 years
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 9, 2020, at 15:27, Joe Monk wrote:
>
> "Easytrieve plus"
>
> You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
>
> There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
>
> Joe
>
>> On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab wrote:
>>
>> 4GL - I've used T
"Easytrieve plus"
You mean sleazytrieve plus? :)
There was also DYL280 and QUIKJOB.
Joe
On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 12:55 PM Mike Schwab wrote:
> 4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
> and generates the cobol code and editing rules. ADR-Datacom had Ideal
> which w
4GL - I've used Telon which takes a screen layout and database layout
and generates the cobol code and editing rules. ADR-Datacom had Ideal
which was similar, later CA. Easytrieve plus I really liked,
especially the report generation part.
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Frank Swarbrick [frank.swarbr...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:02 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
I don't know what any of those terms even mean, so I'll not attempt to answer.
My interest in learning Fortran i
Metz
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 9:19 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Partially. Does Fortran now have reduction operators, e.g., inner product,
trace?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM
...@outlook.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 10:42 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Do you mean like this?
integer, dimension(10) :: a, b, c
a = [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10]
b = [2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11]
c = a + b
print *, "a = ", a
print *, "b = ", b
p
ERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
What about gcc Fortran? Does that run on OMVS? Linux on Z?
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Frank Swarbrick [fr
pparently added as part of the Fortran 90 standard.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 8:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Have they added array operations to Fortran?
--
, June 9, 2020 10:22 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Here's the question I have about Fortran support. Why does IBM support modern
Fortran on platforms like Linux and AIX, but mainframe Fortran (IBM VS FORTRAN)
is still at FORTRAN 77 level and seems to have h
if I were a Fortran
developer this would piss me off greatly.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Evans-Young, Darren
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
FORTRAN 90 was a significant upgrade
: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s. But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed. Not so great for report writing
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Bob
Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 9, 2020 12:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
LOL! I'm reminded that DYL-280II was advertised as a 4GL, with English-like
s
s Ave, SE | MD RSCB2H | Grand Rapids, MI
49546
616.653.8429 | fax: 616.653.2717
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Evans-Young, Darren
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 10:16 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
**CAUTION EXTERNAL
LOL! I'm reminded that DYL-280II was advertised as a 4GL, with English-like
syntax. Neither is true, to my mind. I like DYL-280II, and taught classes in
it at my employer of the time (Volvo Truck NA) as well as workshops at the
DYLAKOR conferences. But it's not a 4GL.
Well, not in the sense
I haven't written anything in FORTRAN since some time in the late '70s. But
even much more recently I heard it's regarded by number crunchers, engineers
say, as the best language for sheer speed. Not so great for report writing
and formatting.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid...@gmail.com, cell 336 382
On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 20:50:12 -0500, Joe Monk wrote:
>In this case, because we are PERFORMing THRU, then GO TO exit, merely
>causes an iterate.
>
It's so nice of COBOL to be written in common language so
any English speaker can intuitively grasp it correctly.
>On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 7:36 PM Frank
: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
lenru...@gmail.com
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 8:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On, long ago and on some DOS/VS Cobol compiler, after a compiler upgrade, there
was a problem with a statement something like this:
READ
al beginnings. Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then, being I
believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 12:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: C
st on behalf
> of Joe Monk
> Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 2:49 AM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: COBOL Question
>
> I think what you mean is this:
>
> PERFORM 1050-LOOP THRU 1059-EXIT VARYING JC FROM 1 BY 1 UNTIL JC = 99
> END-PERFORM
>
> 1050-
ot;make up" for in regards to it's less
than ideal beginnings. Which Fortran can even be forgiven for then, being I
believe about five years older than COBOL (Cobol?).
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020
lf of
Clark Morris
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 12:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
[Default] On 6 Jun 2020 10:53:44 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
robhbrid...@gmail.com (Bob Bridges) wrote:
>Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've
_
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 11:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've been
thinking in REXX too long. In that
ing" procedure will never reach its exit.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Joe
Monk
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 2:49 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
I think what you mean is this:
PERFORM 1050-LOOP THRU 1059-EXIT
behalf of Bob
Bridges
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 11:42 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
I realize this is a bit of a change in subject (and it's not as if we need yet
another one), but I avoid this construction. My phobia is based on an extreme
example: In the
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
For brevity, if you don't like DO END.
select
when idx="T" then countt=countt+1
when idx="U" then countu=countu+1
when idx="V" then countv=countv+1
when idx="W" then countw=countw+1
oth
Results:
1
0
0
0
***
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 4:06 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> /* REXX */
> COUNTT = 0
> COUNTU = 0
> COUNTV = 0
> COUNTW = 0
> TAB.T = "COUNTT=COUNTT+1"
> TAB.U = "COUNTU=COUNTU+1"
> TAB.V = "COUNTV=COUNTV+1"
> TAB.W = "COUNTW=COUNTW+1"
> IDX = 'T'
>
> INTERPRET TAB.I
/* REXX */
COUNTT = 0
COUNTU = 0
COUNTV = 0
COUNTW = 0
TAB.T = "COUNTT=COUNTT+1"
TAB.U = "COUNTU=COUNTU+1"
TAB.V = "COUNTV=COUNTV+1"
TAB.W = "COUNTW=COUNTW+1"
IDX = 'T'
INTERPRET TAB.IDX
SAY COUNTT
SAY COUNTU
SAY COUNTV
SAY COUNTW
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:10 PM Wayne Bickerdike wr
Forgot the quotes!
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:07 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> Or to be controversial:
>
> tab.T = countt=countT+1
> tab.U = countU=countU+1
> tab.V = countV=countV+1
> tab.W = countW=countW+1
>
> INTERPRET tab.idx
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:01 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
>
>> CA-
Or to be controversial:
tab.T = countt=countT+1
tab.U = countU=countU+1
tab.V = countV=countV+1
tab.W = countW=countW+1
INTERPRET tab.idx
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:01 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> CA-IDEAL has SELECT FIRST ACTION AND SELECT EVERY ACTION. That I like.
>
> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2
CA-IDEAL has SELECT FIRST ACTION AND SELECT EVERY ACTION. That I like.
On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:59 PM Wayne Bickerdike wrote:
> For brevity, if you don't like DO END.
>
> select
> when idx="T" then countt=countt+1
> when idx="U" then countu=countu+1
> when idx="V" then countv=countv
For brevity, if you don't like DO END.
select
when idx="T" then countt=countt+1
when idx="U" then countu=countu+1
when idx="V" then countv=countv+1
when idx="W" then countw=countw+1
otherwise countx=countx+1; end
Could be :
SELECT( idx)
when ("T") then countt=coun
No, I wasn't complaining about the SELECT statement, only about using lots of
DO/statement/ENDs when there's only a single statement. I would code the same
thing like this:
select
when idx="T" then countt=countt+1
when idx="U" then countu=countu+1
when idx="V" then countv=countv+1
: COBOL Question
Don’t forget the SKELETON language.
Sent from my iPhone — small keyboarf, fat fungrs, stupd spell manglr. Expct
mistaks
> On Jun 7, 2020, at 4:30 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>
> 1. ISPF is not a language.If you are referring to panel definition
> statements,
>
r achieve consensus.
>
>
> --
> Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
> Bob Bridges [robhbrid...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, Ju
@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 2:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of END
to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF. But, in REXX at least, I
never use single-statement
3:52 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
You could not be more correct. You wrote NOT and I translated that in my head
to the exclamation point. (My C is showing.)
And yes, absolutely, as you say, the problem is the merging of logical not and
XOR operations. The link
ailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bob Bridges
Sent: Sunday, June 7, 2020 11:53 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
You must have misread me somehow, Mr Mills; I didn't say there's a '!' operator
in VBA. You spoke of a '!' operato
You must have misread me somehow, Mr Mills; I didn't say there's a '!' operator
in VBA. You spoke of a '!' operator in C, but I've never heard of that
operator in VBA; all I meant is that maybe I should look in VBA for another
Boolean operator that is different from NOT as you say '!' is differ
Bob,
Would you rather code the select as a series of nested if-then-else?
Lou
On Sun, Jun 7, 2020 at 1:35 PM Bob Bridges wrote:
> The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort
> of END to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF. But, in REXX at
> least, I neve
The only language I can think of off-hand that doesn't require some sort of END
to close a DO (I'm sure there are others) is ISPF. But, in REXX at least, I
never use single-statement DOs. I see them all the time, and I don't get it.
Like this:
if x=0 then do
x=x+1
end
Or, more painf
If you really believe this nonsense then you have never programmed
systems level code which requires cleanup of system resources such as
locks. In 2020 we should not be having this conversation any more - it's
bogus!
Nobody emulates structured programming constructs such as loops using
goto a
I've posted this before many times before! The conversation has got
boring now - yawn!
I would challenge anybody to refactor this code without goto's.
https://github.com/eclipse/omr/blob/e9b85117d18c369108a9ddb790023103c35b4379/thread/common/omrthread.c#L246
On 2020-06-07 1:53 AM, Bob Bridges
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Bernd Oppolzer [bernd.oppol...@t-online.de]
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 7:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
This trigger
: Saturday, June 6, 2020 1:53 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've been
thinking in REXX too long. In that case you're close; I guess I really meant
PERFORM 1050-LOOP THRU 1050-EXIT VARYING JC FROM
...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 2:40 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 15:28:57 -0300, Clark Morris wrote:
>On 6 Jun 2020 10:53:44 -0700, (Bob Bridges) wrote:
>
>>Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgo
[Default] On 6 Jun 2020 12:43:09 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
joemon...@gmail.com (Joe Monk) wrote:
>Granted its been awhile since ive done application code, but if you
>dont end-if they become a nested condition, which I dont think was the
>original intent.
A conditional statement in COBOL is
Granted its been awhile since ive done application code, but if you
dont end-if they become a nested condition, which I dont think was the
original intent.
Joe
On Sat, Jun 6, 2020 at 1:40 PM Paul Gilmartin <
000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 15:28:57 -03
s.htm
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bob Bridges
Sent: Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:57 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Really, a different operator? I didn't know; I bought a C comp
On Sat, 6 Jun 2020 15:28:57 -0300, Clark Morris wrote:
>On 6 Jun 2020 10:53:44 -0700, (Bob Bridges) wrote:
>
>>Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've been
>>thinking in REXX too long. In that case you're close; I guess I really meant
>
But in Rexx similarly, END i
[Default] On 6 Jun 2020 10:53:44 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
robhbrid...@gmail.com (Bob Bridges) wrote:
>Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've been
>thinking in REXX too long. In that case you're close; I guess I really meant
In your example the END-IF is not
Really, a different operator? I didn't know; I bought a C compiler once, a
couple decades ago, but then never used it.
Now I'm wondering whether VBA has such a distinction and I simply assumed, and
never looked for it. I don't think so, but I should remember to look.
---
Bob Bridges, robhbrid
Oh, you need an END-IF even for a single-statement IF? I forgot; I've been
thinking in REXX too long. In that case you're close; I guess I really meant
PERFORM 1050-LOOP THRU 1050-EXIT VARYING JC FROM 1 BY 1 TO 99
1050-LOOP.
IF X > 999 GOTO 1050-EXIT END-IF.
IF FIRST-NAME = "RO
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Bob Bridges
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 11:00 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Reminds me of a situation I had some years ago while writing a VBA program that
used a class (for FTP, I think) that had been written in some
I think what you mean is this:
PERFORM 1050-LOOP THRU 1059-EXIT VARYING JC FROM 1 BY 1 UNTIL JC = 99
END-PERFORM
1050-LOOP.
IF FIRST-NAME NOT = "ROBERT"
GO TO 1059-EXIT
END-IF
IF TYPE NOT = 195
GO TO 1059-EXIT
END-IF
IF NOT SO-ON
GO TO 1059-EXIT
E
Reminds me of a situation I had some years ago while writing a VBA program that
used a class (for FTP, I think) that had been written in some flavor of C. I
was testing a supposedly Boolean return code and getting unexpected results. I
tried several ways, and eventually proved to myself that t
I realize this is a bit of a change in subject (and it's not as if we need yet
another one), but I avoid this construction. My phobia is based on an extreme
example: In their zeal never to use GOTOs, I've frequently seen programmers
write paragraphs like this:
PERFORM 1050-LOOP VARYING JC F
This triggered me once more, sorry :-)
I recall that we once did a larger project, checking all the PL/1 sources
at a customer of mine, looking for errors in program logic, using a tool
that I wrote (sort of a light weight, yet powerful, PL/1 parser).
The parser threw errors (observations) on ab
816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 5:26 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:54:37 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R' means (SMOD (IND1) = 'B') OR (SMOD (IND1) = 'R
on List On Behalf Of
Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 4:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
EXTERNAL EMAIL
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>Using OP
> IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
> AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:54:37 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R' means (SMOD (IND1) = 'B') OR (SMOD (IND1) = 'R');
>syntax for implied comparands exists in other languages as well.
>
I have dealt with a language (Mainsail) that had a ternary compare:
A <= B < C
I don't know
Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 1:33 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
Using OP
IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
AN
-Original Message-
> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> > Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> > Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 1:33 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: COBOL Question
> >
> > On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, D
IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 4:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>Using OP
>
rame Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 1:33 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: COBOL Question
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>
> >Using OP
> > IF TVOLL (IND1) N
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 20:17:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>Using OP
> IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
> AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R'
>
>I would do
> IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
> IF SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R'
> Do the stuff
>
I have (almost)
om: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Paul Gilmartin
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 1:12 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: COBOL Question
>
> On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:56:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>
> >Also, it's often better to nest than to
Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Gibney, Dave
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 2:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
Also, it's often better to nest than to make compound conditions.
> -Original Message-
> From: IB
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 19:56:06 +, Gibney, Dave wrote:
>Also, it's often better to nest than to make compound conditions.
>
Do you mean not expanding the Distributive Law? E.g. you prefer:
A and ( B or C )
to:
A and B or A and C?
Do we need to talk about short-circuit evaluation?
>> --
Also, it's often better to nest than to make compound conditions.
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Charles Mills
> Sent: Friday, June 05, 2020 12:54 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: COBOL Question
>
>
Oppolzer
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 12:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
I hope you don't mind if I comment once again;
my original coding was:
IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R'
and as I learned no
I hope you don't mind if I comment once again;
my original coding was:
IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R'
and as I learned now from your helpful posts,
this is expanded to
IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR SMOD
Seems to me that ~is~ operator precedence: We evaluate AND before OR, just as
we evaluate * before +. But that's closely related to the distributive rule,
right?
P and Q or R
R or P and Q
...both evaluate the same way, to "(P and Q) or R". The distributive property
says that
P and
Thanks to all who responded ... this helped a lot.
And this is definitely the right place to ask :-)
Have a nice day.
Kind regards
Bernd
Am 05.06.2020 um 19:59 schrieb Farley, Peter x23353:
In COBOL the AND logical operator has precedence over the OR logical operator,
so without parenthesis
020 1:46 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:31:16 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>I'm pretty sure that the issue is operator precedence.
>
>(SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R') means (SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR SMOD (IND
As our e-mails crossed in the ether, you are absolutely correct in your
evaluation below.
Rex
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Bernd Oppolzer
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 12:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [External] Re: COBOL Question
RV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Friday, June 5, 2020 10:46 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL Question
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:31:16 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>I'm pretty sure that the issue is operator precedence.
>
>(SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR '
In COBOL the AND logical operator has precedence over the OR logical operator,
so without parenthesis your example is evaluated by the compiler as:
IF (TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B') OR SMOD
(IND1) = 'R'
You said that SMOD (IND1) = 'R' so the condition evaluate
IF (TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE)
AND (SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR SMOD (IND1) = 'R')
is OK for me. That works the same way as the abbreviation.
The problem must be that
IF TVOLL (IND1) NOT = HIGH-VALUE
AND SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R'
evaluates to someth
On Fri, 5 Jun 2020 17:31:16 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>I'm pretty sure that the issue is operator precedence.
>
>(SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R') means (SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR SMOD (IND1) = 'R')
>
Ouch! That's not operator precedence; that's implied Distributive Law.
Does COBOL work that way? I hope
I'm pretty sure that the issue is operator precedence.
(SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR 'R') means (SMOD (IND1) = 'B' OR SMOD (IND1) = 'R')
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on be
99 matches
Mail list logo
